No. 80-140
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1980
THE STATE OF MONTANA,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
-vs-
WILLIAM THOMAS FISHER,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from: The District Court of the Fourth Judicial District,
In and for the County of Lake, The Honorable Jack
L. Green, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellant:
Douglas J. Wold, Polson, Montana
For Respondent :
Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena,
Montana
Richard P. Heinz, County Attorney, Polson,
Montana
Submitted on Briefs: November 1 9 , 1980
Filed: !3/3.! yp:;
Mr. J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t .
T h i s a p p e a l a r i s e s from a c o n v i c t i o n o f d e f e n d a n t of
r o b b e r y f o l l o w i n g a j u r y t r i a l i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e
F o u r t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Lake County.
On F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 1979, d e f e n d a n t was c h a r g e d i n M i s s o u l a
County w i t h t h r e e f e l o n y c o u n t s of b u r g l a r y . Defendant
l a t e r p l e a d e d g u i l t y t o two c o u n t s , and t h e t h i r d was d i s -
missed. P r i o r t o e n t r y o f a judgment of c o n v i c t i o n and
s e n t e n c i n g , however, d e f e n d a n t e s c a p e d from t h e M i s s o u l a
County j a i l .
Following h i s e s c a p e , d e f e n d a n t was c h a r g e d on J u l y
24, 1979, w i t h r o b b e r y i n Lake County. He was c o n v i c t e d of
t h i s c h a r g e i n November 1979 and s e n t e n c e d by t h e D i s t r i c t
C o u r t t o a term o f twenty y e a r s i n t h e s t a t e p r i s o n . The
c o u r t a l s o found: "For p u r p o s e s of p a r o l e , t h e Defendant i s
found by t h e C o u r t t o be a dangerous o f f e n d e r , h i s h a v i n g
been c o n v i c t e d of a f e l o n y i n Missoula County w i t h i n f i v e
(5) years last past."
On J a n u a r y 7, 1980, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t o f t h e F o u r t h
J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , M i s s o u l a County, e n t e r e d judgment and
s e n t e n c e d d e f e n d a n t f o r t h e two c o u n t s of b u r g l a r y f i l e d i n
F e b r u a r y 1979. A judgment and s e n t e n c e was a l s o e n t e r e d
a g a i n s t d e f e n d a n t on a n e s c a p e c h a r g e .
The s o l e i s s u e r a i s e d on a p p e a l i s whether t h e D i s t r i c t
C o u r t i n Lake County c o r r e c t l y d e s i g n a t e d d e f e n d a n t a danger-
o u s o f f e n d e r f o r t h e p u r p o s e of p a r o l e .
S e c t i o n 46-23-201, MCA, provides:
". . . N c o n v i c t s e r v i n g a t i m e s e n t e n c e may
o
b e p a r o l e d u n t i l h e h a s s e r v e d a t l e a s t one-
h a l f of h i s f u l l t e r m .. . e x c e p t t h a t a con-
v i c t d e s i g n a t e d a s a nondangerous o f f e n d e r
under 46-18-404 may be p a r o l e d a f t e r he h a s
s e r v e d o n e - q u a r t e r of h i s f u l l t e r m . . ."
Under section 46-18-404, MCA, the sentencing court
shall designate an offender as nondangerous if:
"(a) during the 5 years preceding the commis-
sion of the offense for which the offender is
being sentenced, the offender was neither con-
victed of nor incarcerated for an offense com-
mitted in this state or any other jurisdiction
for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment
in excess of 1 year could have been imposed;
and
"(b) the court has determined, based on any
presentence report and the evidence presented
at the trial and the sentencing hearing, that
the offender does not represent a substantial
danger to other persons or society.
" (3) If the court determines that an offender
is not eligible to be designated as a nondan-
gerous offender, it shall make that determina-
tion a part of the sentence imposed and shall
state the determination in the judgment. When-
ever the sentence and judgment do not contain
such a determination, the offender is consi-
dered to have been designated as a nondangerous
offender for parole purposes."
Conviction is defined in section 45-2-101(9), MCA:
"'Conviction' means a judgment of conviction
or sentence entered upon a guilty plea or upon
a verdict or finding of guilty of an offense
rendered by a legally constituted jury or
court of competent jurisdiction authorized to
try the case without a jury."
Defendant, on November 28, 1979, was found to be a
dangerous offender based upon a Missoula County felony
"conviction." Defendant, however, was not convicted or
sentenced as to the burglary charges in Missoula County
until January 7, 1980. With this being the case, we find
the District Court improperly used the burglary conviction
as a basis for its dangerous offender designation.
The fact that defendant pleaded guilty to the burglary
charges in Missoula County has no effect upon this Court's
finding. The determination of a nondangerous offender
s t a t u s under s e c t i o n 4 6 - 1 8 - 4 0 4 ( 1 ) ( a ) , MCA, i s based upon a n
e x a m i n a t i o n of p r i o r c o n v i c t i o n s . See S t a t e v. Dahl ( 1 9 8 0 ) ,
Mont. , P.2d , 37 St.Rep. 1852, 1857.
A c o n v i c t i o n c a n n o t be e q u a t e d w i t h a p l e a of g u i l t y .
The c a s e i s remanded t o t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r r e s e n -
tencing, i n accordance with t h i s opinion, w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s
t o d e t e r m i n e i f d e f e n d a n t , under s e c t i o n 46-18-404, MCA, is
t o be d e s i g n a t e d a nondangerous o f f e n d e r f o r p a r o l e p u r p o s e s .
/
' Justice
W concur:
e
n
Mr. Chief J u s t i c e Frank I. Haswell, d i s s e n t i n g .
I would a f f i r m J u d g e G r e e n ' s d e s i g n a t i o n of d e f e n d a n t as a
dangerous defender.
I n March, 1 9 7 9 , d e f e n d a n t p l e a d g u i l t y t o t w o b u r g l a r i e s .
I n J u n e , 1979, d e f e n d a n t escaped from j a i l w h i l e a w a i t i n g
sentencing. I n November, 1 9 7 9 , d e f e n d a n t was c o n v i c t e d of a r o b -
b e r y he committed w h i l e a t l a r g e f o l l o w i n g h i s e s c a p e , s e n t e n c e d
t o 20 y e a r s , and d e s i g n a t e d a d a n g e r o u s o f f e n d e r by r e a s o n of h i s
p r i o r c o n v i c t i o n of b u r g l a r y less t h a n a y e a r p r e v i o u s l y .
The m a j o r i t y remand f o r r e s e n t e n c i n g b e c a u s e d e f e n d a n t ' s
p l e a o f g u i l t y t o t h e two p r i o r b u r g l a r i e s was n o t e q u i v a l e n t to
a c o n v i c t i o n thereof under t h e d e f i n i t i o n contained i n s e c t i o n
45-2-101(a), MCA. T h u s , d e f e n d a n t c o u l d n o t be d e s i g n a t e d a
d a n g e r o u s o f f e n d e r on t h i s b a s i s a c c o r d i n g to t h e m a j o r i t y .
I n my v i e w , t h i s is b l i n d o b e d i e n c e t o f o r m o v e r
substance. I t is c o n t r a r y t o t h e i n t e n t , p u r p o s e and p o l i c y o f
t h e d a n g e r o u s - n o n d a n g e r o u s o f f e n d e r s t a t u t e , s e c t i o n 46-18-404,
MCA. The i n t e n t o f t h i s s t a t u t e is o b v i o u s - - t o restrict parole
e l i g i b i l i t y o f a n o f f e n d e r who h a s c o m m i t t e d a p r i o r f e l o n y
w i t h i n 5 y e a r s o f t h e o f f e n s e f o r which h e is b e i n g s e n t e n c e d . A
d a n g e r o u s o f f e n d e r is n o t e l i g i b l e f o r p a r o l e u n t i l he h a s s e r v e d
one-half o f h i s s e n t e n c e l e s s good time a l l o w a n c e s ; a non-
d a n g e r o u s o f f e n d e r becomes e l i g i b l e f o r p a r o l e a f t e r s e r v i n g one-
f o u r t h o f h i s s e n t e n c e less good t i m e a l l o w a n c e s . Section
46-23-201(a), MCA. I n d e t e r m i n i n g o f f e n d e r s t a t u s and p a r o l e
e l i g i b i l i t y , r e c e n t p r i o r f e l o n i e s c o m m i t t e d by t h e d e f e n d a n t a r e
paramount. S e c t i o n 46-18-404, MCA. What d i f f e r e n c e d o e s it make
w h e t h e r a f o r m a l judgment o f c o n v i c t i o n h a s b e e n e n t e r e d w h e r e
t h e d e f e n d a n t h a s a d m i t t e d t h e p r i o r f e l o n i e s i n o p e n c o u r t by
pleading guilty? To a s k t h e q u e s t i o n is t o a n s w e r i t .
The d e f i n i t i o n o f a c o n v i c t i o n c i t e d i n t h e m a j o r i t y o p i -
n i o n is i n c o m p l e t e . The r e l e v a n t p o r t i o n of t h e d e f i n i t i o n a l
s t a t u t e reads:
- 5 -
'I. .. u n l e s s a d i f f e r e n t meaning p l a i n l y i s
r e q u i r e d , t h e ?allowing d e f i n i t i o n s a p p l y in t h e
title:
" ( 9 ) 'Conviction' means a judgment of c o n v i c t i o n
.o r. f.i n d it n rge d uponi l a y p ofe a an o gfueinl st e o.r .upon
en e
of g u t
l of
f
y
a verdict
."
(Emphasis added. ) S e c t i o n 45-2-101, MCA.
Here a d i f f e r e n t meaning p l a i n l y is r e q u i r e d t o
c a r r y o u t t h e i n t e n t , p u r p o s e and p o l i c y of t h e dangerous-non-
dangerous offender s t a t u t e f o r the reasons expressed i n t h i s
dissent.
A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e o n l y r e a s o n t h a t a f o r m a l judgment of
c o n v i c t i o n of t h e p r i o r b u r g l a r i e s was n o t e n t e r e d i s t h a t d e f e n -
d a n t escaped while awaiting sentencing. I t is f u n d a m e n t a l t o o u r
s y s t e m of j u r i s p r u d e n c e t h a t no one can t a k e a d v a n t a g e of h i s own
wrong; t h i s p r i n c i p l e h a s been e n a c t e d i n t o s t a t u t e i n Montana.
S e c t i o n 1-3-208, MCA. T h i s is p r e c i s e l y what t h e m a j o r i t y have
permitted here.
Chief J u s t i c e
Mr. J u s t i c e J o h n Conway H a r r i s o n :
I concur i n t h e foregoing d i s s e n t .